Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

GQEIX

Is Rajiv Jain shorting the market?
How else to explain a loss of 1.34% May 12 when most large growth equity funds were up 3 or 4%?
Anyone have any insight on this?

Comments

  • edited May 12
    Don’t know. The fund has 55% in its top 10 holdings. So one bad actor could ruin the day.

    Safe havens like utilities got hit pretty hard today. And bonds fell as rates climbed.

    Gold took a thumping. GDX (gold etf) lost 2.82%. Miners got hit extra hard as is normal. GDX (gold miners etf) lost 7.44%. However, I can’t detect any gold or metals exposure in this fund. M* does not show any short positions. FWIW.
  • I do not believe GQG U.S. Select Equity (GQEIX) holds any gold, but I may be mistaken.
  • edited May 12
    dily said:

    I do not believe GQG U.S. Select Equity (GQEIX) holds any gold … .

    I think you are correct.
  • Thank you for taking a look at the fund! I am stumped as to what was the reason behind the decline today.
  • edited May 13
    deleted

    If I understand SEC regs correctly, the fund is only required to report holdings quarterly. Possibly there’s some new position not yet reported.

    (Thanks for posting a new topic.)
  • edited May 13
    When I see your question @dily the first thing I take a look at (for better or worse) is the portfolio composition. The top 10 and sector composition at Fidelity and M* match pretty closely and didn't provide any pokes in the eye with a sharp stick BUT, BUT, BUT they differ from that shown on the GQG website for what that's worth. All 3 show an effective date of March 31, 2025.

    I did not read through the prospectus to see if they can short or not but there is this:

    "Portfolio holdings are subject to change without notice. Top ten holdings do not represent all securities purchased, sold, or recommended for inclusion in the Fund and no assumption should be made that such securities or future investments were or will be profitable in the future. Country allocations reflect the country of risk of the securities in the portfolio as assigned by Northern Trust, though GQG’s portfolios are constructed based upon GQG’s assessment of each issuer’s country of risk exposure, which may not be the same as Northern Trust’s country assignment. Sector, country, and holdings calculations include cash and may not sum precisely due to rounding. Unless otherwise indicated, data and calculations are sourced from GQG Partners, Northern Trust, MSCI, Standard and Poor's (S&P), Morningstar, and certain fund rating agencies." I added the bolding.)

    GQEPX Fact sheet

    GQG website

    (Edit to add: Given that it is an institutional fund maybe a large institution or 2-3-4-5 wanted out. Just a wild guess.)
  • edited May 13
    That’s a very good guess @Mark. I’ve been whipsawed before holding mid-cap stocks that were largely institutionally owned. Sometimes feels like the big players trying to drive out the small investors when a company’s stock continues to fall despite good fundamentals.
  • There was a new executive order about a coming executive order - on drug prices.

    Using M*, I see negative UNH, CI; moreover, LLY, NVO didn't participate in the rally as much. https://finance.yahoo.com/quotes/LLY,NVO,UNH,CI/

    Yahoo Finance has quotes for Top 10 holdings and I see negative PM, T, NFLX. Don't know the detail factors, but interest rates rose and that may have hurt T.

    Anyway, with only 29 holdings, one may be enough to tank the fund, but we have several pointers here. High conviction comes with some risks.
  • msf
    edited May 13
    Mark said:

    When I see your question @dily the first thing I take a look at (for better or worse) is the portfolio composition. The top 10 and sector composition at Fidelity and M* match pretty closely and didn't provide any pokes in the eye with a sharp stick BUT, BUT, BUT they differ from that shown on the GQG website for what that's worth. All 3 show an effective date of March 31, 2025.

    The portfolios I see at Fidelity and at M* are dated Dec 31, 2024. The factsheet with top ten holdings at the fund's website is dated March 31, 2025.

    M* reports a 148% turnover rate, rendering the 2024 reports dubious at best. What jumps out at me is the most recently reported top holding, Philip Morris Int'l (PM). In three months it jumped from #5 (6.08% of portfolio) to #1 (6.51%). By itself, that might not say much, but then one sees Altria (MO) at #4 (4.17%), a completely new holding for 2025. Who knows how much more tobacco the fund bought since March 31.

    Yesterday, they went up in smoke. PM dropped 2.87% and MO dropped 4.17%.

    Some of the PM drop could be because of the dollar's surge, but MO's decline suggests an industry wide dip. Hard to separate the dollar and individual company effects from an industry-wide dip since other major players are foreign. JAPAY (Japan Tobacco ADR) dropped 2.18%, BTI (BAT ADR) dropped 1.58%.
  • I apologize, my mistake. @msf has the correct portfolio dates from M* and Fidelity at Dec 31, 2024.
Sign In or Register to comment.